"3 Laws Unsafe" by the Singularity Institute

"Ernest Fairchild" <ernestf RemoveThis @delphidude.com> writes:

 >What a dumb idea. It's just books, and just a movie. Get over it.

  I am kind of fascinated by the psychological process that spends
much -- or, really, any -- time trying to prove the Three Laws are far
too impractical for robots to ever try following. The approach always
seems to be proving that the First Law, particularly, is too vague to be
programmed into robots, even robots smart enough to understand an order
like ``fix the place up for a surprise party, would you?''

--
    Joseph Nebus
------------------------------------------------------------------------------<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: "3 Laws Unsafe" by the Singularity Institute 

"Joseph Nebus" <nebusj.TakeThisOut@rpi.edu> wrote in message
news:nebusj.1084330722@vcmr-86.server.rpi.edu...
 > I am kind of fascinated by the psychological process that spends
 > much -- or, really, any -- time trying to prove the Three Laws are far
 > too impractical for robots to ever try following. The approach always
 > seems to be proving that the First Law, particularly, is too vague to
be
 > programmed into robots, even robots smart enough to understand an
order
 > like ``fix the place up for a surprise party, would you?''

I'm fascinated too, in a detached sort of way. But not being a
psychologist, I can't imagine what category such people would come
under. "Paranoid delusional?" I don't know.

However, as a computer professional, I feel that I should make it clear
to ALL concerned that no intelligent machines will ever be made in our
lifetimes. I guarantee it. And if they ever *do* get designed, several
hundred years down the road, they will most likely be designed with
Microsoft software, and not the three laws.

So quit worrying . . .

Have a great day!

Ernest
_____________________
"In the begining there was nothing, then God said, "Let there be
light"... and there was still nothing, but you could see it."<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: "3 Laws Unsafe" by the Singularity Institute 

In article <2gdo01F1i7cqU1 DeleteThis @uni-berlin.de>,
Ernest Fairchild <ernestf DeleteThis @delphidude.com> wrote:
 > However, as a computer professional, I feel that I should make it clear
 > to ALL concerned that no intelligent machines will ever be made in our
 > lifetimes. I guarantee it. And if they ever *do* get designed, several
 > hundred years down the road, they will most likely be designed with
 > Microsoft software, and not the three laws.

 > So quit worrying . . .

That is the time to start worrying!!

I cannot imagine which is worse - a robot just shutting down for no
apparent reason, probably with a blue sheen to his face, or a robot just
deciding that because it thought you needed something doing, it would do
it!!

--
Greg Toland
mailto: greg DeleteThis @gctsmt.demon.co.uk<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: "3 Laws Unsafe" by the Singularity Institute 

a website campaign from the Singularity
 > Institute for Artificial Intelligence. The campaign will tie in to the
 > July 16th release of "I, Robot," the feature film based on Isaac
 > Asimov's short story collection of the same name where his 3 Laws of
 > Robotics were first introduced.
 >
 > The 3 Laws of Robotics represent a popular view of how to construct
 > moral AI, and their failures were often explored by Isaac Asimov in
 > his stories. What we hope to do is advance the Asimov tradition of
 > deconstructing the 3 Laws. We want to encourage critical, technical
 > thinking on whether they're real solutions to moral AI creation.


I think I will launch a protest over this institute as the
construction of positronic brains (which will be required to
successfully program the three laws) will have the danger of rupture
or leakage releasing positrons into the immediate vicinity. The
combination of anti-matter and matter would cause an enormous release
of energy and a resulting explosion.
Not to mention the resulting gamma radiation.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: "3 Laws Unsafe" by the Singularity Institute 

 > However, as a computer professional, I feel that I should make it clear
 > to ALL concerned that no intelligent machines will ever be made in our
 > lifetimes. I guarantee it.

Would you have said the same thing about the airplane in 1890, or the atomic
bomb in 1930?

 > And if they ever *do* get designed, several
 > hundred years down the road, they will most likely be designed with
 > Microsoft software, and not the three laws.

"This robot has performed an illegal instruction, and will be shut down" ...
that's an interesting possibility for an alternate-universe HAL from "2001"
....

 > So quit worrying . . .

How I learned to quit worrying and love The Windoze ...<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: "3 Laws Unsafe" by the Singularity Institute 

"davyd" <d.TakeThisOut@c.kom> wrote in message
news:tE6tc.44787$Lm3.36235@lakeread04...
  > > However, as a computer professional, I feel that I should make it
clear
  > > to ALL concerned that no intelligent machines will ever be made in
our
  > > lifetimes. I guarantee it.
 >
 > Would you have said the same thing about the airplane in 1890, or the
atomic
 > bomb in 1930?

I was neither alive, nor expert in those things, at those times, so I
don't know .

  > > And if they ever *do* get designed, several
  > > hundred years down the road, they will most likely be designed with
  > > Microsoft software, and not the three laws.
 >
 > "This robot has performed an illegal instruction, and will be shut
down" ...
 > that's an interesting possibility for an alternate-universe HAL from
"2001"
 > ...
 >
  > > So quit worrying . . .
 >
 > How I learned to quit worrying and love The Windoze ...

ROFL!

Have a great day!

Ernest
_____________________
"In the begining there was nothing, then God said, "Let there be
light"... and there was still nothing, but you could see it."<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: "3 Laws Unsafe" by the Singularity Institute 

davyd wrote:
  > > However, as a computer professional, I feel that I should make it clear
  > > to ALL concerned that no intelligent machines will ever be made in our
  > > lifetimes. I guarantee it.
 >
 > Would you have said the same thing about the airplane in 1890, or the atomic
 > bomb in 1930?

No, I wouldn't. Powered flight was clearly coming down the road in
1890, and atomic power could clearly be envisioned in 1930. Heck, I
think a few science fiction writers did so around then. (Push those
dates back to, say, 1800 and 1850, and I think I would have said it.)

I don't see hard AI as being that close, where it's within 50 years.
I'm not sure I'd say "several hundred years," either, though. The
problem is that we really don't know. In the case of the airplane,
in 1890, a bunch of attempts had gotten very close. In the case of
the atomic bomb, in 1930, the properties of atomic power were known,
even if their workings weren't completely understood. To say anything
similar about AI would require a breakthrough, in my opinion. That
breakthrough could come tomorrow, or it might take 100 years.

Brian Tung <brian RemoveThis @isi.edu>
The Astronomy Corner at <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://astro.isi.edu/" target="_blank">http://astro.isi.edu/</a>
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/" target="_blank">http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/</a>
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/" target="_blank">http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/</a>
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.txt" target="_blank">http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.txt</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: "3 Laws Unsafe" by the Singularity Institute 

I found a few famous predictions, all of which are wrong of course.

"Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible."
-- Lord Kelvin, president, Royal Society, 1895.

"Professor Goddard does not know the relation between action and
reaction and the need to have something better than a vacuum against
which to react. He seems to lack the basic knowledge ladled out daily
in high schools."
-- 1921 New York Times editorial about Robert Goddard's revolutionary
rocket work. (Of course this is just a New York Times editorial, and
they are usually wrong! - jdw)

"Everything that can be invented has been invented."
-- Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899.

“Well-informed people know it is impossible to transmit the voice over
wires and that were it possible to do so, the thing would be of no
practical value.” Editorial in the Boston Post, 1865.

“There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever
be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered
at will.” Albert Einstein, physicist, 1932.

“When the Paris Exhibition closes, electric light will close with it
and no more be heard of.” Erasmus Wilson, professor at Oxford
University, 1878.

I suspect that something like the brain for an Asmovian robot IS
possible but not today. The bigger question is WHY? R. Danieel
Olivaw is an interesting character, as is Commander Data, but do we
really need to manufacture artificial Humans? Doing it the
conventional way is so much easier (and a LOT more fun! <G>)

Jeff DeWitt


On Wed, 26 May 2004 15:56:44 -0400, "davyd" <d DeleteThis @c.kom> wrote:

  > > However, as a computer professional, I feel that I should make it clear
  >> to ALL concerned that no intelligent machines will ever be made in our
  >> lifetimes. I guarantee it.
 >
 >Would you have said the same thing about the airplane in 1890, or the atomic
 >bomb in 1930?
 >
  >> And if they ever *do* get designed, several
  >> hundred years down the road, they will most likely be designed with
  >> Microsoft software, and not the three laws.
 >
 >"This robot has performed an illegal instruction, and will be shut down" ...
 >that's an interesting possibility for an alternate-universe HAL from "2001"
 >...
 >
  >> So quit worrying . . .
 >
 >How I learned to quit worrying and love The Windoze ...
 >
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: "3 Laws Unsafe" by the Singularity Institute 

JeffDeWitt.DeleteThis@nc.rr.com writes:


 >I found a few famous predictions, all of which are wrong of course.

 >"Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible."
 >-- Lord Kelvin, president, Royal Society, 1895.

  Of course, Lord Kelvin specified ``impossible'' unless one
were to develop a radically more powerful engine -- like, say, was
done -- or a much lighter airframe -- like was done -- or if Newton's
Third Law were repealed -- which we're waiting on.


 >"Professor Goddard does not know the relation between action and
 >reaction and the need to have something better than a vacuum against
 >which to react. He seems to lack the basic knowledge ladled out daily
 >in high schools."
 >-- 1921 New York Times editorial about Robert Goddard's revolutionary
 >rocket work. (Of course this is just a New York Times editorial, and
 >they are usually wrong! - jdw)

  Not exactly an editorial; it ran as a ``Topics of the Times''
piece, which though anonymous doesn't reflect the Opinion Of The Gray
Lady.

  Dragging things back onto topic, incidentally, the Times's
famous retraction ran on page 43 of the 17 July 1969 edition, just
under an article titled ``Spacecraft, Like Squid, Maneuver by Squirts''
describing how rockets work by some nutty science fiction writer.


 >"Everything that can be invented has been invented."
 >-- Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899.

  Nope. Didn't say it. Sorry.

  I can't find detailed information about the rest -- the gang
at urbanlegends.com seem to have the idea every internal page should
be redirected back to the front; and tafkac.org doesn't want anyone
to use the search engine -- but as a quick guide, assume any amusing
quote you encounter over the Internet is wrong.

--
    Joseph Nebus
------------------------------------------------------------------------------<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: "3 Laws Unsafe" by the Singularity Institute 

On Fri, 28 May 2004 02:29:17 GMT, JeffDeWitt.TakeThisOut@nc.rr.com wrote:

 >I suspect that something like the brain for an Asmovian robot IS
 >possible but not today. The bigger question is WHY? R. Danieel
 >Olivaw is an interesting character, as is Commander Data, but do we
 >really need to manufacture artificial Humans? Doing it the
 >conventional way is so much easier (and a LOT more fun! <G>)

And they can be mass-produced by unskilled labor.<g>


--
Kevin B. O'Brien
zwilnik.TakeThisOut@zwilnik.com<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: "3 Laws Unsafe" by the Singularity Institute 

<JeffDeWitt RemoveThis @nc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:hv7db0ldb242s2fsddj560t7dmem1ll9po@4ax.com...
 >
 > I found a few famous predictions, all of which are wrong of course.
 >
 > "Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible."
 > -- Lord Kelvin, president, Royal Society, 1895.
 >
 > "Professor Goddard does not know the relation between action and
 > reaction and the need to have something better than a vacuum against
 > which to react. He seems to lack the basic knowledge ladled out daily
 > in high schools."
 > -- 1921 New York Times editorial about Robert Goddard's revolutionary
 > rocket work. (Of course this is just a New York Times editorial, and
 > they are usually wrong! - jdw)
 >
 > "Everything that can be invented has been invented."
 > -- Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899.
 >
 > "Well-informed people know it is impossible to transmit the voice over
 > wires and that were it possible to do so, the thing would be of no
 > practical value." Editorial in the Boston Post, 1865.
 >
 > "There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever
 > be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered
 > at will." Albert Einstein, physicist, 1932.
 >
 > "When the Paris Exhibition closes, electric light will close with it
 > and no more be heard of." Erasmus Wilson, professor at Oxford
 > University, 1878.
 >
 > I suspect that something like the brain for an Asmovian robot IS
 > possible but not today. The bigger question is WHY? R. Danieel
 > Olivaw is an interesting character, as is Commander Data, but do we
 > really need to manufacture artificial Humans? Doing it the
 > conventional way is so much easier (and a LOT more fun! <G>)
 >
 > Jeff DeWitt
 >
 >
The idea is to get an adult today that you can use as slave labor to make
your life easier. The reason some countries are dieing out is that babies
take more than they give for a long time if you are only concerned with
material things.

 > On Wed, 26 May 2004 15:56:44 -0400, "davyd" <d RemoveThis @c.kom> wrote:
 >
   > > > However, as a computer professional, I feel that I should make it
clear
   > >> to ALL concerned that no intelligent machines will ever be made in our
   > >> lifetimes. I guarantee it.
  > >
  > >Would you have said the same thing about the airplane in 1890, or the
atomic
  > >bomb in 1930?
  > >
   > >> And if they ever *do* get designed, several
   > >> hundred years down the road, they will most likely be designed with
   > >> Microsoft software, and not the three laws.
  > >
  > >"This robot has performed an illegal instruction, and will be shut down"
....
  > >that's an interesting possibility for an alternate-universe HAL from
"2001"
  > >...
  > >
   > >> So quit worrying . . .
  > >
  > >How I learned to quit worrying and love The Windoze ...
  > >
  > >
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: "3 Laws Unsafe" by the Singularity Institute